Model comparison
GPT-5.4 mini vs Grok 4.7
Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.1 to 45.0 on the Noometry Index. GPT-5.4 mini costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 32 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 32 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.4 mini scores higher in 3 categories and Grok 4.7 in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.7 leads 49.1 to 30.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SimpleQA Verified: 29.4% for GPT-5.4 mini and 56% for Grok 4.7.
- GPT-5.4 mini is cheaper at $0.75 / $4.50 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.7.
- Grok 4.7 accepts more context: 500K tokens versus 400K.
Side by side
| GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.7 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 45.0 | 53.1 |
| Released | 2026-03-17 | 2026-09-21 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 400K | 500K |
| Max output | 128K | 500K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.75 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4.50 | $6 |
| Results tracked | 46 | 39 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.7 leads
GPT-5.4 mini: 45.2 (#72), Grok 4.7: 58.0 (#18)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierCode | 27% | 47.6% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1397 | 1639 |
| SciCode | 49.9% | 57.8% |
| LMArena Coding | 1438 | 1427 |
| CursorBench | — | 46.3% |
| FrontierSWE | — | 29.5% |
| WeirdML | 60.3% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,189 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.7 leads
GPT-5.4 mini: 29.9 (#81), Grok 4.7: 36.7 (#37)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 54.6% |
| DeepResearch Bench | 36.3% | — |
| GDP.pdf | — | 22.8% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 10,537 |
Reasoning Grok 4.7 leads
GPT-5.4 mini: 30.4 (#85), Grok 4.7: 49.1 (#40)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 61.8% | 76.8% |
| CritPt | 10% | 18% |
| Chess Puzzles | 24% | 38% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1424 | 1413 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 11% | 29% |
| DTBench | 80% | 96% |
| LMCA | 40.8% | 49.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 148.84 | 153.53 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 18.9% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 37.9% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 63.7% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 61.7% | — |
| ForecastBench | 57 | — |
Math Grok 4.7 leads
GPT-5.4 mini: 45.5 (#75), Grok 4.7: 57.8 (#39)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 51.2% | 53% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 9.8% | 17.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 88.9% | 98.1% |
| ProofBench | 21% | 34% |
| LMArena Math | 1419 | 1407 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 28.3% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 2.1% | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.7 leads
GPT-5.4 mini: 51.5 (#67), Grok 4.7: 62.8 (#22)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 86.9% | 92.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 29.4% | 56% |
| LMArena Expert | 1435 | 1422 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 5.5% | — |
Multimodal GPT-5.4 mini leads
GPT-5.4 mini: 39.7 (#56), Grok 4.7: 35.5 (#87)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1245 | 1228 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 32.5% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 20.8% |
Multilingual GPT-5.4 mini leads
GPT-5.4 mini: 51.9 (#96), Grok 4.7: 50.8 (#116)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1405 | 1389 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1446 | 1455 |
| LMArena French | 1440 | 1455 |
| LMArena Russian | 1417 | 1397 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1405 | 1400 |
| LMArena German | 1409 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1374 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1368 | — |
Instruction Following Too close to call
GPT-5.4 mini: 74.1 (#102), Grok 4.7: 74.1 (#105)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1405 | 1404 |
Long Context Too close to call
GPT-5.4 mini: 43.0 (#112), Grok 4.7: 43.1 (#104)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1407 | 1413 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.7 leads
GPT-5.4 mini: 64.0 (#58), Grok 4.7: 70.0 (#24)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1412 | 1399 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1370 | 1391 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1665 | 2007 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1429 | 1393 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.4 mini better than Grok 4.7?
Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.1 to 45.0 on the Noometry Index. GPT-5.4 mini costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.4 mini or Grok 4.7?
GPT-5.4 mini is cheaper. It lists at $0.75 per million input tokens and $4.50 per million output tokens; Grok 4.7 lists at $2 and $6.
Is GPT-5.4 mini or Grok 4.7 better for coding?
Grok 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.0 versus 45.2 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.7 does, with 500K tokens against 400K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.4 mini and Grok 4.7 share?
32 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.4 mini has 46 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.7 has 39.